This one is a little out of the ordinary, but things are a little slow here lately anyway, so here goes: In reading accounts of square-rigger voyages, the descriptions of preparing for bad weather invariably refer to stripping the ship down to lower topsails. I have always been curious as to why it is considered better to have topsails (which are higher and would thereby exert more heeling leverage on the ship) up, rather than to take them in and have mainsails unfurled instead. Of course, the mains have larger areas, but their leverage is less and being closer to the deck I would think they would be easier to deal with in bad conditions. Would it have anything to do with lower sails being sometimes blanketed by large seas, thereby giving a higher sail a more consistent pressure? Any square rigged windjammers out there?
- Status
just a guess
I believe that the lower topsails are immediatly above the mains on the old tall ships. Not very high up the mast. My guess is these are above any solid water breaking over the ship, which would carry away any sails. Storm jibs on modern boats are flown fairly high off the deck for this same reason. What I can't imagine is what kind of ride those poor fellows must have had to endure at times. I tremble under bare poles in conditions where they were probably still carrying full sails and walking around with a coffee in their hand.
I believe that the lower topsails are immediatly above the mains on the old tall ships. Not very high up the mast. My guess is these are above any solid water breaking over the ship, which would carry away any sails. Storm jibs on modern boats are flown fairly high off the deck for this same reason. What I can't imagine is what kind of ride those poor fellows must have had to endure at times. I tremble under bare poles in conditions where they were probably still carrying full sails and walking around with a coffee in their hand.
Square riggers?
Hi Bob, Dunno if you have seen this site I will link to, but if you can get past the terminology it is chock full-o-facts that might help your quest for knowledge. Homero the sailor man. PS. I have wondered the sawme thing, let us know if you finger it out.
Hi Bob, Dunno if you have seen this site I will link to, but if you can get past the terminology it is chock full-o-facts that might help your quest for knowledge. Homero the sailor man. PS. I have wondered the sawme thing, let us know if you finger it out.
In addition, there's wind shadow to consider
It is possible that the lower topsails were left hoisted (instead of the mainsails) because the mainsails would get wind shadowed by the tall waves when the boat was in the trough, and then fill with a bang when the boat crested a wave. Having slightly higher sails could minimize this effect. Steve Alchemist C-320
It is possible that the lower topsails were left hoisted (instead of the mainsails) because the mainsails would get wind shadowed by the tall waves when the boat was in the trough, and then fill with a bang when the boat crested a wave. Having slightly higher sails could minimize this effect. Steve Alchemist C-320
What a source!
Thank you, Homero. I have heard of that publication but never went to the trouble of finding it. You have given me what will be hours of good reading. Indeed, the author does address my original question, and you are correct, Alchemist, he refers to having the the deployed sails high enough not to be shrouded by the seas. He also indicates that some sail should be set forward (foresail) for help in steering. There are also very interesting observations on trimming sails so that the conning officer can determine when the ship is close to luffing or being in danger of being taken aback. Southernman (BC? Then where would Northernman be from?), I think you make a good point too - if you have seen that video of the Peking rounding the Horn in 1929, you know how high the seas can reach. Especially in the age of cotton and flax sails, I'm sure that was a consideration. Those guys were truly pushing the limits of their equipment - the account in "The Wanderer of Liverpool" of sailing a square rigger through a cyclone in the Indian Ocean still makes me pucker, though I've read it at least a dozen times.
Thank you, Homero. I have heard of that publication but never went to the trouble of finding it. You have given me what will be hours of good reading. Indeed, the author does address my original question, and you are correct, Alchemist, he refers to having the the deployed sails high enough not to be shrouded by the seas. He also indicates that some sail should be set forward (foresail) for help in steering. There are also very interesting observations on trimming sails so that the conning officer can determine when the ship is close to luffing or being in danger of being taken aback. Southernman (BC? Then where would Northernman be from?), I think you make a good point too - if you have seen that video of the Peking rounding the Horn in 1929, you know how high the seas can reach. Especially in the age of cotton and flax sails, I'm sure that was a consideration. Those guys were truly pushing the limits of their equipment - the account in "The Wanderer of Liverpool" of sailing a square rigger through a cyclone in the Indian Ocean still makes me pucker, though I've read it at least a dozen times.
Ability to Reef
I think (but I am not sure) that mainsails or courses, were generally either set or furled - I am not sure that these very large sails were reefable. the reason has to do with their weight. On a large ship, a main course would be something like 3,000 sq ft of wet canvase - probably weigh in at over a ton. The topsails would be neither as wide nor as deep - so area of say 1,000 sq. ft. Still a tought job to reef, but at least possible. By the way, I believe that this is why topsails started to be split between upper and lower topsails on separate yards sometime in the middle to late 19th century - to make large areas of canvas more manageable (and also to allow smaller crews on commercial vessels). A great book to read on the final days of commercial sail is "The Last Grain Race" by Eric Newby - South Australia to England with the first harvest of Australian wheat, in a steel hulled barque.
I think (but I am not sure) that mainsails or courses, were generally either set or furled - I am not sure that these very large sails were reefable. the reason has to do with their weight. On a large ship, a main course would be something like 3,000 sq ft of wet canvase - probably weigh in at over a ton. The topsails would be neither as wide nor as deep - so area of say 1,000 sq. ft. Still a tought job to reef, but at least possible. By the way, I believe that this is why topsails started to be split between upper and lower topsails on separate yards sometime in the middle to late 19th century - to make large areas of canvas more manageable (and also to allow smaller crews on commercial vessels). A great book to read on the final days of commercial sail is "The Last Grain Race" by Eric Newby - South Australia to England with the first harvest of Australian wheat, in a steel hulled barque.
Start reading some naval fiction...
such as the RAMAGE series by Dudley Pope. Or the ongoing Alan Lewrie novels by Dewey Lambkin. They dwell on the warships of the Napoleonic era and you will learn a tremendous amount about how these vessels sail. A typical rig would be 3 masts(fore, main and mizzen), with the lower, largest sail being the "main course" then the "topsails", next the "topgallants" and finally the "royals". The mizzen (aftermost) mast had no main course, but rather a boom and gaff rigged "spanker". This sail was critical to balancing the helm. In battle the british doused the courses and maneuvered with the topsails and topgallants. This was to avoid fires starting from the cannon flare. It also improved visibility. These huge sails were rarely set in a blow because they were hard to handle and dangerous when waves broke over the deck (as mentioned elsewhere.) Besides the mast rigged sails there were a number of jibs set on the forestays. There were staysails rigged on stays between the masts and of course there were "stunsails" which were extensions of the topsails that were rigged on sliding booms run out along the topsail yards. You'll see an example of the stunsails in the movie "master and commander" when they're chasing down the coast of south america. With the multitude of sail combinations available the ship could control its speed, trim and balance. Wow, I'm really rambling.... I love those books so much.
such as the RAMAGE series by Dudley Pope. Or the ongoing Alan Lewrie novels by Dewey Lambkin. They dwell on the warships of the Napoleonic era and you will learn a tremendous amount about how these vessels sail. A typical rig would be 3 masts(fore, main and mizzen), with the lower, largest sail being the "main course" then the "topsails", next the "topgallants" and finally the "royals". The mizzen (aftermost) mast had no main course, but rather a boom and gaff rigged "spanker". This sail was critical to balancing the helm. In battle the british doused the courses and maneuvered with the topsails and topgallants. This was to avoid fires starting from the cannon flare. It also improved visibility. These huge sails were rarely set in a blow because they were hard to handle and dangerous when waves broke over the deck (as mentioned elsewhere.) Besides the mast rigged sails there were a number of jibs set on the forestays. There were staysails rigged on stays between the masts and of course there were "stunsails" which were extensions of the topsails that were rigged on sliding booms run out along the topsail yards. You'll see an example of the stunsails in the movie "master and commander" when they're chasing down the coast of south america. With the multitude of sail combinations available the ship could control its speed, trim and balance. Wow, I'm really rambling.... I love those books so much.
I did!
In my youth I read the Hornblower books, then later devoured the Alexander Kent and Patrick O'Brien volumes, along with numerous others. (Read "Bird of Dawning" by John Masefield for a little different sort of story about the clippers) So here is another question for you square-rigger fans: there were at least two sails that were sometimes set above the royals on square-riggers. Does anyone know what either or both were called?
In my youth I read the Hornblower books, then later devoured the Alexander Kent and Patrick O'Brien volumes, along with numerous others. (Read "Bird of Dawning" by John Masefield for a little different sort of story about the clippers) So here is another question for you square-rigger fans: there were at least two sails that were sometimes set above the royals on square-riggers. Does anyone know what either or both were called?
Skysails
Bob; I learned this from O'brien I think. can you imagine what it must have looked like to have stuns'ls and skys set? Not to mention the work involved; they did not have dacron in those days!
Bob; I learned this from O'brien I think. can you imagine what it must have looked like to have stuns'ls and skys set? Not to mention the work involved; they did not have dacron in those days!
A couple more...
I have also read of "moonrakers" and "trust-to-Gods" being set on very temporary upper topmasts. What a sight that must have been.
I have also read of "moonrakers" and "trust-to-Gods" being set on very temporary upper topmasts. What a sight that must have been.
- Status